On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 11:31:57 AM CEST Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 19-06-18, 11:22, Lucas Stach wrote: > > Hi Viresh, > > > > Am Dienstag, den 19.06.2018, 14:35 +0530 schrieb Viresh Kumar: > > > On 08-06-18, 11:06, Bastian Stender wrote: > > > > The cooling device should be part of the i.MX cpufreq driver, but it > > > > cannot be removed for the sake of DT stability. > > > > > > I am not sure what you meant by DT stability here. Can you please explain that ? > > > > The goal that we strive for in i.MX land is that a any newer kernel > > boots on a older DT without functional regressions compared to a > > matching DT/kernel pair when possible. > > Right, that's being backwards compatible and we must do that. > > > > What about calling both OF and non-OF calls from the cpufreq driver, based on > > > the fact that data is present in DT or not ? > > > > That's right, we could move the cooling device registration completely > > to the cpufreq driver. As that would consolidate the code some more, I > > agree that this is the right way to go. > > We are good to go then :) So I've applied the patch. Thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
